USPTO serial 76114431
SPOT'ON
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- OH, WON TEAK
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 114 - EXAMINING ATTORNEY ASSIGNED
What this means
These status codes mean the trademark application is abandoned and no longer pending. Common reasons include missing an Office Action response (600), filing without a valid basis (602), express abandonment by the applicant (604), or failure to respond to an examiner's inquiry (618). Revival may be possible in limited circumstances. If abandonment was unintentional, consult counsel about a petition to revive. Otherwise file a new application if protection is still needed.
Need help with SPOT'ON?
If you own this trademark, we can monitor new filings and help with USPTO deadlines. If you do not, we can file a new U.S. application.
Owner
1702 Groot-Bijgaarden, BE
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Arthur S. Garrett
ARTHUR S GARRETT FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW, GARRETT &1300 I ST NWWASHINGTON, DC 20005-3315UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 042 | CONCEPTION AND DEVELOPMENT OF COMPUTER SOFTWARE FOR USE IN THE BROADCASTING INDUSTRY | ACTIVE | — |
Related trademarks
CopyMark links this record to cited §2(d) serials, the owner's other marks, Nice classes, similar mark names, and recently changed USPTO applications.
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 14, 2005 | MAB2 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - FAILURE TO RESPOND | The trademark application was abandoned because a required response or document was not filed by the deadline — usually a missed Office Action response. The application is dead unless a petition to revive is granted within a limited time. |
| Nov 12, 2005 | ABN2 | ABANDONMENT - FAILURE TO RESPOND OR LATE RESPONSE | The trademark application was abandoned because a required response or document was not filed by the deadline — usually a missed Office Action response. The application is dead unless a petition to revive is granted within a limited time. |
| Apr 11, 2005 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 8, 2005 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 25, 2005 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Aug 13, 2004 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jan 12, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Dec 12, 2001 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 26, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 10, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 27, 2001 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION MAILED | A non-final Office Action means the USPTO examining attorney has raised at least one issue with your trademark application but has not made a final decision. You usually have three months to respond with arguments, amendments, or evidence. Missing the deadline can abandon the application. |
| Feb 15, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 12, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |